BioWare - Mass Effect Trilogy Bundle Announced

When does the Mass Effect Trilogy release? Mass Effect Trilogy releases on November 6th 2012 for Xbox 360 and PC, and later for PlayStation 3.
What does the Mass Effect Trilogy include? Mass Effect Trilogy includes all three Mass Effect titles, featured in a new premium foil box featuring artwork of Commander Shepard. Is the Mass Effect Trilogy compatible with other versions of Mass Effect, for example multiplayer? Yes, the Mass Effect Trilogy will be compatible with other versions of Mass Effect. You will be able to play Mass Effect 3 multiplayer with other players.

No mention of the dlc. One question EVERYONE (from Bioware Social Network, Steam Forums) Does this include all the dlc also? Here, and everywhere else) is asking, and the silence from EAWare is deafening.

My guess is none. EA did not put out a complete edition of Dragon Age 2 as well and I doubt they will do the same for Mass Effect when they a) already have more DLC coming and b) can charge people potentially another $20+ per game..

considering ME3 still has forthcoming DLC there's no way DLC will be included and the fact that Dragon Age 2 still has no edition released with all DLC either, I'm not sure if there will ever be a ME complete edition. though for people like Thrasher I would wait another year to see if that happens as ME2 has a substantial amount of DLC some of which should not be missed. The only one I've played for ME3 is the one that came with Prothean at release which is quality though should have been a part of the base game.

— —-when we figure out how to build guillotines for corporations the new revolution will have begun—-

I agree that it won't include DLC. If it did, they would surely have publicised it as a selling point. We might see "ME Trilogy Gold Edition" at some point which will include a load of DLC codes (they won't put the DLC on disk - this is EA we're talking about, they will want to prevent second hand sales).

Maybe when it comes to the core story (not counting the two other major story arcs) but otherwise, not really.
All three games have (quite different) strengths and weaknesses and weighing these against each other certainly isnīt straightforward.
For example, itīs even fairly disputable whether ME1 is better game than ME3, considering the vastly superior combat system, character development, itemization and a lot less time consuming filler in the latter.

At any rate, itīs far less clear cut compared to Matrix which shouldīve just remained a film without sequels .

Funny thing is I've bought #1 as hard copy (no DLC) (btw the manual is a waste of paper), #2 as a download (no DLC), and played neither. Now, IF they offer all 3 together with all the important DLC I "may" buy them for $10. But this does not seem like that… :/

Originally Posted by JDR13
Well I haven't played ME3 yet, but there's no doubt in my mind that ME1 was a lot better than ME2. At least it was for me.

I disagree on that. I've enjoyed both ME1 and ME2 but for very different reasons. I loved the story and lore of ME1 while I loved the NPC interactions and cinematic + engaging Paragon/Renegade system in ME2. As Deepo mentioned, ME1 and ME2 has very different strengths and weaknesses (I haven't played ME3, so don't know about that).

Originally Posted by DeepO
For example, itīs even fairly disputable whether ME1 is better game than ME3, considering the vastly superior combat system, character development, itemization and a lot less time consuming filler in the latter.
.

Wait, wait, wait. I can agree that combat was better in Me3 than 1 (ofc I won't comment ONE space button for so many actions, for pc ofc), but hell I remember first playing ME1… I could handle MAKO, bad weapon/upgrade system, "itemization" problem etc. BUT. THERE was damn logic-i hadn't any problem with mechanic flaws of the game - it delivered believable story, and characters you liked. Two next games took credits of it. Instead of repairing flaws of the first installment Bioware took odd direction in ME2 (it wasn't bad - but,,,, 1. all character missions could be an brilliant PART of the story not a base of it -i.e. that could work greatly in ME1. 2. I understand the scope of ME2 - humans get raped, more personal approach blah, human reaper, blah blah… but with second part of the story sth started to collapse-I know that the lead writer Drew K. left but why it was so hard to continue the logic of the story.
I won't write about ME3. So many did a good job (i.e. on yt: Archangeia, MrBtongue, Smudboy) to catch all flaws. The problem is, Bioware allowed to betray the roots of the story, which made the franchise so AAAWEEESOME - YES it was the story! not awesome combat, not awesome weapon packs… and the worst of it is that they trying to convince gamers that it is an "artistic vision". Dunno if any game developer have insulted me more..

Originally Posted by purpleblob
I disagree on that. I've enjoyed both ME1 and ME2 but for very different reasons. I loved the story and lore of ME1 while I loved the NPC interactions and cinematic + engaging Paragon/Renegade system in ME2.

Engaging Paragon/Renegade system? You mean the obvious choices whether or not to piss someone off? I didn't find that very engaging or much else about ME2 for that matter. I can only recall a single quest where the correct "choice" wasn't entirely obvious to me. (Project Overlord).

I did like the variety of companions in ME2, and some of their side missions were interesting. I liked Jack and Samara's loyalty quests in particular. Other than the companions though, I thought ME2 was a step backwards in pretty much every way.